Hiring Formerly Incarcerated People Is Good, Actually

[Kamaji]

Hiring Formerly Incarcerated People Is Good, Actually

Some conservative media outlets and politicians lambast the practice. But if you care about public safety, that opposition doesn't make sense.

BILLY BINION
9.14.2022

"Americans from across the political spectrum can unite around prison reform legislation that will reduce crime while giving our fellow citizens a chance at redemption," former President Donald Trump said in November 2018. "So if something happens and they make a mistake, they get a second chance at life."

A month later, Trump signed the First Step Act—one of his signature pieces of legislation, which gave second chances to many people with criminal records. It was a good bill that every Republican in the House voted for, save two. However, now conservatives—including supporters of Trump's signature criminal justice reform bill—are claiming that it's wrong to hire former criminals.

"Democratic Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney has history of employing convicts," the New York Post wrote on September 3. In the story, we learn that Maloney has reportedly paid two people with criminal records: Theodore Bickley, who served six years after he was found with $900 in counterfeit cash, and Jonathan Alvarez, who served 12 years for manslaughter.

*  *  *

Conservatives have taken the same approach in the Pennsylvania Senate race.  "Pennsylvania Democratic Senate nominee John Fetterman hired two convicted murderers to work for his campaign," Fox News wrote earlier this month, "and his Republican opponent in the state's November election, Mehmet Oz, claims it shows he is soft on crime."

*  *  *

It's a strange point for a publication or a politician to make. We should keep punishing two men, we're told, for crimes they potentially did not commit and for which they received clemency.

Do conservatives also feel that way about the men and women who received clemency from Trump?

The notion that people should be expelled from polite society after leaving prison might sound tempting to those who want revenge. But that pound of flesh was extracted by prison, and post-incarceration employment is one of our most effective ways to discourage recidivism. Fox lamented that "the two brothers have raked in nearly $50K" since they were hired last December. That's not much between two grown men who earned it through legal employment. What exactly does the Fox writer want them to do instead?

Ninety-five percent of state prisoners will be set free at some point. The question we have as a society is what we let them do with that freedom when they get it. If you support law and order, you should want all of them to succeed for the sake of that principle, not despite it.

*  *  *

Source:  https://reason.com/2022/09/14/hiring-formerly-incarcerated-people-is-good-actually/

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

I read that collection agents often hire felons and such to do collections... for obvious reasons.

[Smokin Joe]

I read that collection agents often hire felons and such to do collections... for obvious reasons.

I guess it depends on what you'd need done...

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

I guess it depends on what you'd need done...

I think just having a felon on the other line is enough for a lot of people to give up the cash. So the thinking goes.

[The_Reader_David]

I'm old enough to remember when having served the sentence for a crime was referred to as "having paid one's debt to society", and was supposed to give the ex-con a new start in life.  Sometime between my childhood and the present, we collectively seem to have decided that Javert is actually the hero of Les Miserables, and that having been convicted of a crime makes one, by definition, an irredeemable life-long criminal, so that ex-cons won't be hired for essentially any job, thereby making it hard for them to go straight even when they want to.

[Kamaji]

I'm old enough to remember when having served the sentence for a crime was referred to as "having paid one's debt to society", and was supposed to give the ex-con a new start in life.  Sometime between my childhood and the present, we collectively seem to have decided that Javert is actually the hero of Les Miserables, and that having been convicted of a crime makes one, by definition, an irredeemable life-long criminal, so that ex-cons won't be hired for essentially any job, thereby making it hard for them to go straight even when they want to.

Same here.

[GtHawk]

If no one will give someone a chance to make an honest living, to re-enter society how can they actually live without a return to crime? I realize that there will always be those who commit crimes, rob and steal because they are lazy SOBs who refuse to work or abide by society's rules and always will but until we can just shoot them....

[Kamaji]

If no one will give someone a chance to make an honest living, to re-enter society how can they actually live without a return to crime? I realize that there will always be those who commit crimes, rob and steal because they are lazy SOBs who refuse to work or abide by society's rules and always will but until we can just shoot them....

[Free Vulcan]

A company I worked for hired felons, but it was always those who did stupid crap back in the young buck days, then grew out of it and led productive lives.

Back in the day it was a permanent black mark, but now given the state of our society employers are somewhat more lenient if that person has demonstrated stability and maturity since getting out.

[jmyrlefuller]

I'm old enough to remember when having served the sentence for a crime was referred to as "having paid one's debt to society", and was supposed to give the ex-con a new start in life.  Sometime between my childhood and the present, we collectively seem to have decided that Javert is actually the hero of Les Miserables, and that having been convicted of a crime makes one, by definition, an irredeemable life-long criminal, so that ex-cons won't be hired for essentially any job, thereby making it hard for them to go straight even when they want to.

It started with Megan's Law. First they came for the pedophiles, and people said nothing because you're not going to find any substantial number of people justifying pedophilia, for obvious reasons. But it provided the backdoor for using the mechanisms behind that law for other crimes, no matter how minor.

[Cyber Liberty]

It started with Megan's Law. First they came for the pedophiles, and people said nothing because you're not going to find any substantial number of people justifying pedophilia, for obvious reasons. But it provided the backdoor for using the mechanisms behind that law for other crimes, no matter how minor.

@jmyrlefuller

Until recently, being convicted of a Felony meant "No voting for life."  Now, even in conservative AZ, Civil Rights are restored automatically a few months after all restitution and fines are paid off.  In my life, "forever banned" was the norm.  And, if we are to get these good people back into productive members of society, we need to restore those rights when we can.  The author of the OT makes some damned good points.

[roamer_1]

A company I worked for hired felons, but it was always those who did stupid crap back in the young buck days, then grew out of it and led productive lives.

Back in the day it was a permanent black mark, but now given the state of our society employers are somewhat more lenient if that person has demonstrated stability and maturity since getting out.

That's right. I have personal experience with hiring felons. Quite a few of my employees had records. A couple, pretty bad records.

Two things about that. First, my insurance company had quite a bit to do with who I hired... And the higher risk associated with felons made them less desirable for insurance purposes... As time went on, that factor alone began to prevent me from hiring more. The last five years of my career with employees, hiring cons was strictly verboten.

Secondly, completely from a managing point of view, I would much rather risk a sober felon than deal with the drunks and druggies which are the normal fare, especially among painters. I have only had two instances where I got bit for having hired a felon (who undoubtedly stole from me... Proven...). I can't tell you how many times I was messed up by people who were drunk or high on the job.

[Sighlass]

I worked at one of those places (years ago) that hired felons.... I remember they drew my number for a pee test (drug test) and also one of my co-workers (he had a history with drugs etc...)... I went to take my test and he pulled up suddenly and went past me in line (had his wife drive since he wasn't allowed to) and in and out he was gone... He failed his drug test (had his little girl pee in a jug for him), cause I guess he didn't keep the pee warm enough (they temp measure it). For some reason I got a lot of drug testing done while at this job (think they wanted to keep the positives down and knew I didn't take drugs). Either that, or I just looked so rough they figured it best to keep testing me. 

[Idiot]

Most of the roughnecks who work here on the drilling rigs are mostly felons.  As a matter of fact I was visiting with one a few days ago and he was telling me how he robbed a 7-11 with a gun in his younger days.  He blames it on his girlfriend at the time.  Now he has a court date coming up for having a rather large amount of hydrocodone on his person.  Of course he's not guilty...lol.

If it weren't for the grace of God go I.   

[Sighlass]

@jmyrlefuller

Until recently, being convicted of a Felony meant "No voting for life."  Now, even in conservative AZ, Civil Rights are restored automatically a few months after all restitution and fines are paid off.  In my life, "forever banned" was the norm.  And, if we are to get these good people back into productive members of society, we need to restore those rights when we can.  The author of the OT makes some damned good points.

Yeah, I ain't too happy to see felons voting, cause you can bet they will vote for democrats (for drug reasons).

[roamer_1]

Yeah, I ain't too happy to see felons voting, cause you can bet they will vote for democrats (for drug reasons).

That ain't altogether true, @Sighlass ... Many of my friends are good ol boys that kicked up their heels a bit too high when they were young and stupid... Some have done time, and some have done hard time... But all of them are good, honest men, and deserve the right to the 2nd amendment and the right to vote, just like I do - There ain't no difference beside the fact that I never graduated beyond a  few stints at the county jail.

And to a man, they are all conservative - Even those that enjoy a joint or two now and then.

[Cyber Liberty]

That ain't altogether true, @Sighlass ... Many of my friends are good ol boys that kicked up their heels a bit too high when they were young and stupid... Some have done time, and some have done hard time... But all of them are good, honest men, and deserve the right to the 2nd amendment and the right to vote, just like I do - There ain't no difference beside the fact that I never graduated beyond a  few stints at the county jail.

And to a man, they are all conservative - Even those that enjoy a joint or two now and then.

Conservatives and stoners are actually natural allies.  A stoned person wants to just sit and enjoy the mellow, and conservatives are content to just let them be.  It's great when the stoners figure this out, they usually become one of us because of it.  A much better circle of friends in the end, and now we're old farts, leaving each other the hell alone.

[roamer_1]

Conservatives and stoners are actually natural allies.  A stoned person wants to just sit and enjoy the mellow, and conservatives are content to just let them be.  It's great when the stoners figure this out, they usually become one of us because of it.  A much better circle of friends in the end, and now we're old farts, leaving each other the hell alone.

That's all right, but there's some emphasis to be had there... I grew up old-skool redneck - Pretty much cowboy - And by comparison, even in my party days, I was pretty straight-laced. We had wild women, beer, whiskey, shine, and tobacco... and never went to drugs... I can't say I had no exposure, but I did have very little within my natural group set. So even marijuana was frowned upon.

And I pretty much retained that even in town with my shop-dog and speed shop friends, where drugs were far more common, especially weed.

I think the thing that changed my mind was the liberty I saw taken by the war on drugs. Being western, I hold a pretty libertarian view anyway, and the incursions into liberty soured me against how they were doing that.

Dunno what's the right balance anymore, but I am more accepting than I would have been, because it strictly ain't none of my business (at some point)...

And as I have aged, and found many of my friends turning to marijuana for relief from pain, and a means to sleep, well that stretched me out a little more.

[Smokin Joe]

When you consider "Felon" includes a spectrum of folks from those who cheated on their taxes or just got some bad advice and got bit, clear to people who rape, murder, even eat their victims, I think there are a lot of factors that cannot be generalized and have to be considered on a case-by-case basis.

As for the whole "Forever a Felon" attitude, I think that comes from some notable career criminals and a host of high recidivism types, especially including pedophiles and twisted sexual crimes and junkies, many of whom are simply less likely to reform and change than some of their fellow felons who did something particularly stupid in their youth and had the book thrown at them.

It depends on the individual, but today, because so many crimes involve drugs, one way or another, I'd want to know the person is 'clean' and staying that way, just for starters.

[Sighlass]

Conservatives and stoners are actually natural allies.  A stoned person wants to just sit and enjoy the mellow, and conservatives are content to just let them be.  It's great when the stoners figure this out, they usually become one of us because of it.  A much better circle of friends in the end, and now we're old farts, leaving each other the hell alone.

@roamer_1 @Cyber Liberty

Here is the picture of the car my wife was driving with my two young kids inside that was hit by a young stoner lady (early 20s). Our cadi car was hit and knocked in the other lane of traffic where it was sideswiped in the other lane of traffic. Wife was in hospital through Christmas (5 days)... Kids were ok except for a few broken glass cuts. They spend the night in the hospital just in case.

I don't view drugs the same as yall do, never will. Almost took my whole family, my world (excluding Jesus) few days before Christmas. Wife was doing last second Christmas shopping out of town.

[roamer_1]

@roamer_1 @Cyber Liberty

Here is the picture of the car my wife was driving with my two young kids inside that was hit by a young stoner lady (early 20s). Our cadi car was hit and knocked in the other lane of traffic where it was sideswiped in the other lane of traffic. Wife was in hospital through Christmas (5 days)... Kids were ok except for a few broken glass cuts. They spend the night in the hospital just in case.

I don't view drugs the same as yall do, never will. Almost took my whole family, my world (excluding Jesus) few days before Christmas. Wife was doing last second Christmas shopping out of town.

I have a similar picture @Sighlass ... But it ain't much different than the one my best friend died in, and his wife and kid dang near too... that wreck was caused by a drunk evading arrest on a Sunday morning as they were going to church.

The point being that it really don't matter WHAT they're high on... What matters is THAT they're high and driving while intoxicated. The manner of intoxication matters little.

[Cyber Liberty]

@roamer_1 @Cyber Liberty

Here is the picture of the car my wife was driving with my two young kids inside that was hit by a young stoner lady (early 20s). Our cadi car was hit and knocked in the other lane of traffic where it was sideswiped in the other lane of traffic. Wife was in hospital through Christmas (5 days)... Kids were ok except for a few broken glass cuts. They spend the night in the hospital just in case.

I don't view drugs the same as yall do, never will. Almost took my whole family, my world (excluding Jesus) few days before Christmas. Wife was doing last second Christmas shopping out of town.

How exactly is blaming a drug any better than blaming an unhappy childhood for someone who murdered? 

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

@roamer_1 @Cyber Liberty

Here is the picture of the car my wife was driving with my two young kids inside that was hit by a young stoner lady (early 20s). Our cadi car was hit and knocked in the other lane of traffic where it was sideswiped in the other lane of traffic. Wife was in hospital through Christmas (5 days)... Kids were ok except for a few broken glass cuts. They spend the night in the hospital just in case.

I don't view drugs the same as yall do, never will. Almost took my whole family, my world (excluding Jesus) few days before Christmas. Wife was doing last second Christmas shopping out of town.

Yeah and people texting, fiddling with the radio, eating etc. etc.

Kinda like blaming guns for gun deaths no?

[Sighlass]

How exactly is blaming a drug any better than blaming an unhappy childhood for someone who murdered? 

I don't know what you are driving at @Cyber Liberty  ... I do know that the statement of " A stoned person wants to just sit and enjoy the mellow...." is not all true... it is generalized as true, but stoners drive and go places just like others do (otherwise my wife would not have been in that wreck)... if all they did was sit in some basement then I too wouldn't mind so much of them wasting away harmlessly (except for the fact that society usually ends up taking care of them in some fashion).

There is a reason insurance companies give discounts to companies that drug test... Insurance companies understand the increased accidents drugs (all types) cause. The stats don't lie, otherwise insurance companies wouldn't offer lower rates. I don't hate someone cause they mess up here and there, I have messed up here and there myself, I still do stupid things at times. Just today, I used my grinder without the safety shield, and without safety glasses (short cut, figured I would risk it, got grit in my eye due being stupid). But at what point do you want the person driving a hyster all day just feet from others while knowing they probable smoked dope the night before? I have seen what one of those things do to support beams in a building (twice).

Two schools of thought, one is people will do it anyway... true in probable half the cases (drugs must be somewhat fun, otherwise it would not be done)... Other POV is that if the penalty is stiff enough, enough will consider the dangers and avoid taking drugs (or at least make it far less often). I try to ram the second point into my kids heads... that drugs are just not worth the danger (life is dangerous enough as is). A hard sell in today's environment (pleasure of self is central to life) unless you show them families torn apart by narcotics/alcohol/gambling/speeding/etc.... We keep kids often from families that are battling drug addiction (usually because the grandparents are now having to raise them and need help education wise).

@Weird Tolkienish Figure who says "kinda like blaming guns for gun deaths"... The problem with that is it isn't true, drugs do cause problems and they affect others whether they like it or not. People do not inject guns.  Ignoring drug problems does not cause problems to disappear any more than ignoring Osama Bin Ladin (Clinton- bomb an aspirin factory and call it quits) stopped the second WTB attacks. Drugs cause more problems than just accidents of course, a stroll around any major west coast town dodging poo will prove that.

[Sighlass]

I have a similar picture @Sighlass ... But it ain't much different than the one my best friend died in, and his wife and kid dang near too... that wreck was caused by a drunk evading arrest on a Sunday morning as they were going to church.

The point being that it really don't matter WHAT they're high on... What matters is THAT they're high and driving while intoxicated. The manner of intoxication matters little.

For the most part I agree, anything that clouds one's judgement more is not helpful. Accidents happen, we are human... but now days we have states making it easier for more accidents to occur due to their coddling of drugs to the masses (easy prescriptions or decriminalization of certain drugs). Several studies have came out on the rate of increased wrecks in states that legalized drugs, far as I can surmise, none of the stats were good.

I guess all of us can google "Legalized drugs increased accidents" and read the reports.